posted at 10:41 am on August 22, 2014 by Guy Benson

A brand new WMUR Granite State poll shows New Hampshire’s US Senate race tightening considerably:

A new poll shows that a possible race between U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., and Republican Scott Brown is a tossup. Last month, Brown trailed Shaheen in the WMUR Granite State Poll by 12 points. The new poll shows Shaheen leading brown by 2 points, 46 percent to 44 percent. “I feel very good because when I’m going out and about into people’s businesses, holding town halls — town halls are an important thing — and conveying my thoughts about being an independent voice for New Hampshire, it’s resonating,” Brown said…Shaheen could be getting dragged down by President Barack Obama’s approval numbers, which sit at an all-time low in New Hampshire.

The Brown/Shaheen head-to-head hasn’t been even remotely this close since, well, we wrote about this Dartmouth survey back in early May. Since then, the race has appeared to be slowly slipping away, with the incumbent leading by roughly 10 points in most polls. We’ll see if the new WMUR poll — which is very respected in the state — is a blip, or the first data point in a trend. Since the outfit’s last poll showed Shaheen’s leading challenger down by a dozen points, Republicans have been consoling themselves with this history lesson from the station’s political director:

The reality is that this race, like Shaheen other races for Senate in 2002 and 2008, will break one way or the another [much] later in the fall, possibly even in the last two weeks. History should tell us something. In 2002 Shaheen was leading her Republican opponent going into the last week and then lost. In 2008, the race broke Shaheen’s way in the last month.

But these new numbers can’t be construed as a ‘late break.’ What might explain the ten-point swing in the course of one month? Part of it may be the fact that Brown has been holding one public town hall meeting after another, while Shaheen has refused to conduct any. (Does that dynamic — Brown criss-crossing a state, out-hustling an entitled and cloistered Democratic opponent — stir any memories?) Brown’s campaign has also been relentlessly hammering away at Obamacare, which is highly unpopular in New Hampshire, and for goodreason. But Obamacare’s been a thorn in Shaheen’s side for months, during her highs and lows, and the cumulative effect of intensive retail politics doesn’t generally amount to a double-digit swing in such a short time span. So what else could be driving the big shift? Take a look at Brown’s last two television commercials:

He’s been hammering on immigration for weeks now; the first spot posted above pre-dated Tom Cotton’s tough ad in Arkansas. Meanwhile, Terri Lynn Land is also running an immigration-themed ad up in Michigan. Someone, somewhere obviously believes the resonance of the border crisis as an issue isn’t limited to red states. To wit, when an in-depth polling memo from the NRSC landed in my inbox yesterday morning (hours before the WMUR poll was released), I was a bit surprised to see Shaheen featured as one of the incumbents listed as “primed for defeat.” The polling picture linked had been pretty ugly for months, I thought. Do they know something we don’t, or is this just pro forma partisan rah-rahism? Regardless of whether the NRSC was tipped off on the survey that was about to drop, one element of their analysis jumped off the page:

Internal polls show that her opposition to increased border security and her role in Obama’s push for “Executive Amnesty” are extremely potent in the Granite State.

Internal polls driving a “potent” on-air message may have revived Brown’s campaign, at least for now. I’ll leave you with two questions: If this momentum is real, can Brown keep it rolling over the next two-plus months? And do you think Shaheen might be among those leading this frantic, behind-the-scenes charge?

@conncarroll I would not be surprised if there is a hard internal push from Ds to delay DACA 2.0 until after elections

Context: Sargent often serves as a DSCC stenographer, and Shaheen has been known to cast about for quick, short-term fixes to her self-inflicted political problems. Obama’s rumored executive amnesty may have to wait.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Comments

Gee, who woulda thunk it? Appealing to the base(the real base, not cronies like the Chamber of Commerce) can generate enthusiasm and lead to electoral success. And this is in New Hampshire. Imagine what railing on the border crisis and illegal immigration could do for candidates closer to the South.

Gee, who woulda thunk it? Appealing to the base(the real base, not cronies like the Chamber of Commerce) can generate enthusiasm and lead to electoral success. And this is in New Hampshire. Imagine what railing on the border crisis and illegal immigration could do for candidates closer to the South.

Doughboy on August 22, 2014 at 10:46 AM

The question is: Will Scott Brown, if elected, continue this stance or will he adopt the RINO/CofC position in the end?

It’s a phucking disgrace that 40% of the illegal immigrants are visaoverstayers who have simply gone off the grid. Talk about an enemy within. These people should be deported regardless how long it ever takes for them to be uncovered.

Obama announced in June that he planned
to bypass congressional gridlock and
overhaul the nation’s immigration system on his own.

Since then, the process of drafting what will
likely be the only significant immigration
changes of his presidency — and
his most consequential use of executive power
— has been conducted almost entirely
behind closed doors, where lobbyists and
interest groups invited to the White House
are making their case out of public view.

Obama is presiding over opaque policy-making,
with the potential to reward political backers
at the expense of other interests.

If this momentum is real, can Brown keep it rolling over the next two-plus months?

Brown is going for an early September PRIMARY. Brown can “keep it going” what you need to ask is if Bob Smith looses, he won’t have some kind of tantrum and instigate people staying home from the polls. Democrats are already muck raking to see what kind of trouble they can cause in the press and in debates, with alienating questions.

Bob Smith is a pro-life candidate who has lost before, but a long time ago was the Senator from NH, and has a tendency to act up, quitting the GOP and spoiling as an independent, and saying he would vote for John Kerry at one point, you know, immature behavior because he lost. In NE, the democrats know how to alienate voters from our side, they do it by only publicizing things GOP candidates say that sounds like democrat ideas. It’s hitting two birds with one stone, saying their ideas are correct, and their ideas must be correct if that lunatic GOP candidate seems to agree. They also fund straw “independent” “pro-family” candidates to draw off pro-life votes. Some worry the libertarians and the Free Staters might muck rake for Shaheen too, hoping for legalized Pot.

I’m fairly young, but I vividly remember when Scott Brown, the “Great Hope of Massachusetts,” managed to win Ted Kennedy’s long-held Senate seat. Now? Brown looks like yet another carpetbagger aiming for another shot at power.

I’d definitely prefer Scott Brown in the Senate compared to a run-of-the-mill, rubber-stamp-for-Obama and leftist member of the Fascist Democrat Party like Shaheen, but I can understand why stories like these may not inspire conservatives around here.

Also, the amnesty pushes always receive blowback from the American people. Always. The establishment class never learns its lesson, and it eventually comes back to bite them.

Here performing eye surgeries on blind Guatemalans for several days in the rural town of Salama, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) strongly criticized President Obama’s immigration policy in a closed-door Wednesday meeting with Guatemalan President Otto Perez Molina.

“I told him, frankly, that I didn’t think the problem was in Guatemala City but that the problem was in the White House in our country, and that the mess we’ve got at the border is frankly because of the White House’s policies,” Paul said in an interview.

Taxpayers, work harder. They need more of your labor, the traitors from both sides.

ISIS will kill all of you who hide with your heads in the sand, going lalalalalalalala. They are in the US already.

All obama’care’ shills, out, out, out. It ruins all of you.

Schadenfreude on August 22, 2014 at 11:03 AM

Yes, they are here. I posted this on the thread about the letter from ISIS, and it dove tails, I think, with your take. You may not be as ‘extreme’ as me, but y’all should be, IMHO…

Anyone who thinks that these vermin maggots are not already here and setting up shop via Barack Obama’s porous open border policy is flat out naive.

There is ample evidence found in the trash and other litter found at the border breach areas…prayer rugs, Korans and the like.

They ARE here, and we will feel the pain of our Pollyanna type false sense of security very soon.

In every mosque in the U.S., one will find Islamic Jihadists, and in every Mosque in America, you will find those plotting their jihad right on our soil.

I continue to call for the expulsion of Muslims from our country as well as the closing of every mosque in existence in America.

Freedom of religion is not relevant in this case, as Islam is NOT a religion, but a cult. An evil one at that.

The world will never be safe until Islam is eradicated and the United States will continue to be in grave peril so long as we welcome these vile, filthy miscreants into our midst.

Call me an Islamophobe if you will. Call me a bigot if you must. Call me unhinged and dangerous to the “peaceful” and ‘moderate’ Muslims if you feel more at ease, but consider yourselves having been warned.

But the only reason Scott Brown was not born in New Hampshire was because Pease Air Force Base in Portsmouth, where his dad was stationed and where he and Scott’s mom were living on-base when Scott was born, did not have its own base hospital back then. Therefore, Brown was born at the closest military hospital, which is located on the NH-Maine border (Portmsouth Naval Shipyard). The hospital itself is on the part of the base in Maine.

So beat up on Brown for anything else, but calling him a carpetbagger just shows total ignorance of his background.

In a small state like NH, retail politics and campaigning really does matter.

mypalfish on August 22, 2014 at 12:09 PM

Sure does. In past Presidential races, I’ve met Rudy Giuliani in a hardware store, John McCain in a donut shop, and once almost hit that idiot Phil Gramm when he opened his car door into oncoming traffic in downtown Hanover on the Dartmouth College campus!

As a registered voter in NH I am supposed to go to the polls and vote for Brown? After holding our noses and voting for McCain and Romney we are looking at “3rd times a charm.” That’s a hard sell to all the folks who have said to me “I will not vote for Brown. I will stay home.” Brown is a lite-wait with a record in the senate the has Rhino written all over it. No thanks.

As a registered voter in NH I am supposed to go to the polls and vote for Brown? After holding our noses and voting for McCain and Romney we are looking at “3rd times a charm.” That’s a hard sell to all the folks who have said to me “I will not vote for Brown. I will stay home.” Brown is a lite-wait with a record in the senate the has Rhino written all over it. No thanks.

RickinNH on August 22, 2014 at 1:06 PM

Yes, you’re right. I voted for both McCain and Romney, and look where it got us.

and her role in Obama’s push for “Executive AMNESTY”
are extremely potent in the Granite State.

Obama is preping to unilaterally LEGALIZING
the status of several million ILLEGAL ALIENS.

The process of drafting “Executive AMNESTY”
— and Obama’s most consequential use of
executive power — has been conducted almost
entirely BEHIND CLOSED DOORS, where lobbyists
and interest groups invited to the White House
are making their case OUT OF PUBLIC VIEW.

Obama is presiding over opaque policy-making,
with the potential to reward political backers
at the expense of other interests.

……………………………………………………………………..
Paul Ryan said that he believed that a lot of voters

now had “buyer’s remorse” about giving Obama a second term.
______________________________________

Mitt Romney: Obama worse than even I expected
______________________________________

“I was not a big fan of the president’s policies,
as you know, either domestically or internationally,”
Mr. Romney said, “but the results of
his mistakes and errors, in my opinion,
have been more severe
than even I would have predicted.”
______________________________________

Mr. Romney said. “We’ll make sure people
understand that we’ve got ideas
to get this country working again [and]
we’re going to do it. We’re going to
get wages up and jobs up.”

______________________________________
Romney: Heck, even I never thought
Obama could be This Bad
______________________________________

Mitt Romney recently told a crowd of
enthusiastic supporters in West Virginia
that even he was surprised by
how much of a failure President Obama’s
second term has become.

Businesses report that as a result of Obamacare
• the number of workers they employ is lower
• there has been an increase in part time jobs
• leading to a big increase in outsourcing
• Obamacare costs are being largely passed on to customers

• there has been a big jump in PREMIUMS, DEDUCTIBLES,
Out-of-pocket maximums, and Copays,

It doesn’t matter when obama tries to pull this illegal stunt of granting amnesty, the public knows he and his cronies like Shaheen are all for it and that they deparately want to do it. Keep hammering her on it. Brown is an excellent campaigner and will beat her.

As a registered voter in NH I am supposed to go to the polls and vote for Brown? After holding our noses and voting for McCain and Romney we are looking at “3rd times a charm.” That’s a hard sell to all the folks who have said to me “I will not vote for Brown. I will stay home.” Brown is a lite-wait with a record in the senate the has Rhino written all over it. No thanks.

RickinNH on August 22, 2014 at 1:06 PM

Dumbest thing I’ve heard in a long time. Sure Brown may only be a 5 out of 10 on your conservative meter, but do you want a socialist dem who is a -2 out of 10 to win? I don’t care what you think of Brown, we can’t let these dem fools win. One word-”judges”.

So the issue that the elite tell me will doom the Republican party in 2016 and beyond so we must pass reform and legalize 10 million more future Dems in the process is the focal point of a New England Senate race where ads are running against it and helping by as much as 10 points. In New England?

Let’s see what the polls show after the primary. Will Brown coalesce the GOP voters and or will the losing primary candidates supporters stay home. I suspect as we see one national crisis follow a national scandal follow a crisis etc., the disatisfied will come out and vote for change rather than the status quo even if the agent of change is not perfect.

We have had to many ‘Massholes’ here in NH. Your asking a lot from ‘Live Free or Die.” At some point we need to turn this country around and sending a McCain Republican to Washington won’t do it. Over and over we’er told “hold your nose and maybe the stink will go away. NEVER AGAIN!!!

I’m all for sending a message to RINO’s, but Shaheen was thought to be safe, so if there is a legit chance of beating her, then Scott deserves our support. This isn’t even a close call. At the very least, if the race remains close, the Dems will have to use resources here.

BTW, the new MU Law poll comes out on Wednesday, so we’ll see if Gov Walker is still doing poorly against Mary Burke.

I was told by a very, very good source that both camps internals show Walker +2, which is believable with Rasmussen showing Walker up one and MU showing a tied race.

(This of course assumes he wins the primary, which is likely at this point; I’m quite sure that you’ll all be voting for Bob Smith in the primary.)

Will you really vote for Shaheen? Or someone else, or not vote at all? Because like it or not, this seat may be the seat which decides the senate. If your dislike for Scott Brown exceeds your dislike of Harry Reid, then by all means, vote your conscience. If, however, you really care about control of the senate (which will be able to totally stop all of Obama’s insane appointments and exert a good deal of pressure on some of his other questionable nonsense), then please vote for Brown in the general election. Yes he’s a squishy RINO who only votes with the party 50-60% of the time, but Shaheen votes with Obama about 97% of the time, and I’d like to switch mummies in charge of the senate; RINO McConnell is much better than hard-core Democrat Harry Reid.

I’m utterly opposed to the grossly superficial notion of voting for looks, but for those who aren’t I simply can’t fathom how one could possibly look at manifestly adult Scott Brown and choose manifestly infantile Warren (MA) & Shaheen (NH) instead unless it was to choose a D over an R, though with those kind of “voters” it’s amazing they’d be literate enough to tell the difference!

When Scott Brown was elected to the Kennedy seat, it was pure bliss. All of the excitement that was around that special election ended once I got to know his politics. After he was elected, the first thing he said was John McCain is his favorite senator… I knew then what he was and still is. If he can unseat a Democrat, that’s good and all, but just remember what Rubio, McCain, Graham and Flake did. Also, keep in mind how much McConnell is behind a lot of the liberal Republican senators and their twisted methods of voting and enabling the liberal agenda like Kelly Ayotte voting for cloture on the Obamacare funding, but voting against the bill. Say what? That means she voted to allow the funding bill to have a general vote, seeing how it only needed 51 votes in the general vote to pass and there were 55 Democrats, it means she voted to pass it even if she voted against the bill in the general on party lines. Kelly Ayotte was able to run to twitter immediately and say how she voted against the bill and nobody asked her otherwise. That’s the kind of senator Scott Brown is, Kelly Ayotte in a suit, John McCain 30 years younger.

CommieJuice on August 22, 2014 at 6:51 PM
Spot on. Thank you for your post. When you tell people what kind of a senator Kelly Ayotte is they look at you like your crazy. Some of us see the real Kelly Ayotte.

“I feel very good because when I’m going out and about into people’s businesses, holding town halls — town halls are an important thing — and conveying my thoughts about being an independent voice for New Hampshire, it’s resonating,” Brown said…

Sadly, when Scott Brown talks about being “an independent voice” it translates into him voting for the liberal Democrat agenda.

If, however, you really care about control of the senate (which will be able to totally stop all of Obama’s insane appointments and exert a good deal of pressure on some of his other questionable nonsense)…

Horologium on August 22, 2014 at 5:41 PM

Be sure that you don’t assume or confuse what Boehner and McConnell COULD do with what little they have proven time and again that they will do.